Would standings look different with three-point games?

Ever since overtime was introduced into pro hockey, I’ve wondered how the NHL and AHL can claim competitive balance when some games are worth two points but others are worth three.

In other words, when a game goes beyond regulation, both teams are assured points, meaning three points are awarded in games that end in overtime or a shootout, versus only two for regulation games.

It seems logical to me that teams winning in regulation should be awarded three points, and those winning in overtime or a shootout should get two. I’ve raised the point with AHL president Dave Andrews, who says the larger point totals make it seem like teams that are further out of the playoff race than they actually are.

Andrews also said that when the formula of three points for a regulation victory has been applied, there is little discernable difference in the order of the teams. So I decided to try it myself.

What I have found it is that Andrews may be right. Here are the current AHL Eastern Conference standings on the left, and the recalculated standings on the right:

1

Norfolk Admirals*

97

1

Norfolk Admirals*

139

2

St. John’s IceCaps*

86

2

St. John’s IceCaps*

118

3

Connecticut Whale*

77

3

Connecticut Whale*

101

4

W-B/Scranton Penguins

85

4

W-B/Scranton Penguins

113

5

Hershey Bears

84

5

Hershey Bears

113

6

Bridgeport Sound Tigers

75

6

Bridgeport Sound Tigers

100

7

Manchester Monarchs

73

7

Manchester Monarchs

98

8

Syracuse Crunch

71

8

Syracuse Crunch

94

9

Adirondack Phantoms

69

9

Adirondack Phantoms

94

10

Providence Bruins

69

10

Portland Pirates

92

11

Portland Pirates

68

11

Providence Bruins

91

12

Springfield Falcons

68

12

Springfield Falcons

91

13

Worcester Sharks

67

13

Albany Devils

91

14

Albany Devils

67

14

Worcester Sharks

89

15

Binghamton Senators

59

15

Binghamton Senators

82

* — division leader

The same eight teams would be in the playoff chase, and no team moved more than one position in the standings. The Albany Devils, though, would be only one game out of eighth place, rather than two games out as they are now.

I did the same with the Eastern Conference of the NHL and found similar results:

1

N.Y. Rangers*

101

1

N.Y. Rangers*

148

2

Boston*

91

2

Boston*

135

3

Florida*

87

3

Florida*

123

4

Pittsburgh

100

4

Pittsburgh

147

5

Philadelphia

96

5

Philadelphia

140

6

New Jersey

90

6

New Jersey

132

7

Ottawa

88

7

Ottawa

127

8

Washington

84

8

Washington

122

9

Buffalo

84

9

Buffalo

121

10

Winnipeg

78

10

Winnipeg

113

11

Tampa Bay

77

11

Tampa Bay

112

12

Carolina

75

12

Toronto

108

13

Toronto

75

13

Carolina

105

14

N.Y. Islanders

73

14

N.Y. Islanders

104

15

Montréal

71

15

Montréal

100

* — division leader

Again the same eight teams make the playoffs, with no team dropping or gaining more than one position.

Maybe that makes even a better argument for the three-point game.

It makes more sense to have all the game worth the same value. It certainly would appease the teams trying to gain playoff spots, only to find two teams above them in the standings involved in a three-point game.

I never understood how you can award a team for losing. Giving a point for taking a game into overtime seems too much reward for too little an accomplishment. So I would award 3 for a win and 1 for a tie, 0 for a loss and 2 for an overtime winner. The shootout is an abomination on so many levels that I’ll just leave it at that and suggest its quick demise. I bet if you apply my rubric to the current ’11-’12 results you’d get a much different outcome because teams will lose the “consolation” points they are currently awarded and the stronger teams that can win more in regulation will be at the top of the standings.

Interesting side note: When teams in the English Premier League were playing ” 10 men behind the ball” Soccer version of the “neutral zoen trap” The FA decided that instead of 2 points for a win it will be 3 and one for a tie zero for a loss. Well that inturn opened up play considerably .Why the NHL did not adopt the same rules ( instead of No pass on double yellow or if the Hot dog vendor is in quadrant 6) is Beyond me. Ah the NHL as once quipped ” a success despite itself”

@anyman – “too little an accomplishment” for taking a game into overtime. Interesting choice of words. A team that pulls their goalie in the final few minutes puts on quite a risk – 0 pts vs a chance at 2. Two teams battling 0-0 for 60 minutes probably did more than skating drills, and I imagine the goalies might have a save total somewhere above 0. Does a regulation final of 5-5 mean neither team accomplished enough?
The point system is a bit counter-intuitive, but it makes for a closer playoff race, which is good for the league as a whole. I don’t see a need for a “winners get more credit for winning” point system.